We prove that the degree structures of the d.c.e. and the 3-c.e. Turing degrees are not elementarily equivalent, thus refuting a conjecture of Downey. More specifically, we show that the following statement fails in the former but holds in the latter structure: There are degrees f > e > d > 0 such that any degree u ≤ f is either comparable with both e and d, or incomparable with both.

Khutoretskii's Theorem states that the Rogers semilattice of any family of c.e. sets has either at most one or infinitely many elements. A lemma in the inductive step of the proof shows that no Rogers semilattice can be partitioned into a principal ideal and a principal filter. We show that such a partitioning is possible for some family of d.c.e. sets. In fact, we construct a family of c.e. sets which, when viewed as a family of d.c.e. sets, has (up (...) to equivalence) exactly two computable Friedberg numberings ¼ and ν, and ¼ reduces to any computable numbering not equivalent to ν. The question of whether the full statement of Khutoretskii's Theorem fails for families of d.c.e. sets remains open. (shrink)

We solve a longstanding question of Rosenstein, and make progress toward solving a longstanding open problem in the area of computable linear orderings by showing that every computable ƞ-like linear ordering without an infinite strongly ƞ-like interval has a computable copy without nontrivial computable self-embedding. The precise characterization of those computable linear orderings which have computable copies without nontrivial computable self-embedding remains open.

Hirschfeldt and Shore have introduced a notion of stability for infinite posets. We define an arguably more natural notion called weak stability, and we study the existence of infinite computable or low chains or antichains, and of infinite $\Pi _1^0 $ chains and antichains, in infinite computable stable and weakly stable posets. For example, we extend a result of Hirschfeldt and Shore to show that every infinite computable weakly stable poset contains either an infinite low chain or an infinite computable (...) antichain. Our hardest result is that there is an infinite computable weakly stable poset with no infinite $\Pi _1^0 $ chains or antichains. On the other hand, it is easily seen that every infinite computable stable poset contains an infinite computable chain or an infinite $\Pi _1^0 $ antichain. In Reverse Mathematics, we show that SCAC, the principle that every infinite stable poset contains an infinite chain or antichain, is equivalent over RCA₀ to WSCAC, the corresponding principle for weakly stable posets. (shrink)

We explore the problem of constructing maximal and unbounded filters on computable posets. We obtain both computability results and reverse mathematics results. A maximal filter is one that does not extend to a larger filter. We show that every computable poset has a \Delta^0_2 maximal filter, and there is a computable poset with no \Pi^0_1 or \Sigma^0_1 maximal filter. There is a computable poset on which every maximal filter is Turing complete. We obtain the reverse mathematics result that the principle (...) "every countable poset has a maximal filter" is equivalent to ACA₀ over RCA₀. An unbounded filter is a filter which achieves each of its lower bounds in the poset. We show that every computable poset has a \Sigma^0_1 unbounded filter, and there is a computable poset with no \Pi^0_1 unbounded filter. We show that there is a computable poset on which every unbounded filter is Turing complete, and the principle "every countable poset has an unbounded filter" is equivalent to ACA₀ over RCA₀. We obtain additional reverse mathematics results related to extending arbitrary filters to unbounded filters and forming the upward closures of subsets of computable posets. (shrink)

We characterize the structure of computably categorical trees of finite height, and prove that our criterion is both necessary and sufficient. Intuitively, the characterization is easiest to express in terms of isomorphisms of (possibly infinite) trees, but in fact it is equivalent to a Σ03-condition. We show that all trees which are not computably categorical have computable dimension ω. Finally, we prove that for every n≥ 1 in ω, there exists a computable tree of finite height which is δ0n+1-categorical but (...) not δ0n-categorical. (shrink)

We construct the set of the title, answering a question of Cholak, Jockusch, and Slaman [1], and discuss its connections with the study of the proof-theoretic strength and effective content of versions of Ramsey's Theorem. In particular, our result implies that every ω-model of RCA 0 + SRT 2 2 must contain a nonlow set.

We study the filter ℒ*(A) of computably enumerable supersets (modulo finite sets) of an r-maximal set A and show that, for some such set A, the property of being cofinite in ℒ*(A) is still Σ0 3-complete. This implies that for this A, there is no uniformly computably enumerable “tower” of sets exhausting exactly the coinfinite sets in ℒ*(A).

We show that for every nontrivial r.e. wtt-degree a, there are r.e. wtt-degrees b and c incomparable to a such that the infimum of a and b exists but the infimum of a and c fails to exist. This shows in particular that there are no strongly noncappable r.e. wtt-degrees, in contrast to the situation in the r.e. Turing degrees.

We prove that a (recursively) enumerable degree is contiguous iff it is locally distributive. This settles a twenty-year old question going back to Ladner and Sasso. We also prove that strong contiguity and contiguity coincide, settling a question of the first author, and prove that no m-topped degree is contiguous, settling a question of the first author and Carl Jockusch [11]. Finally, we prove some results concerning local distributivity and relativized weak truth table reducibility.

We exhibit a finite lattice without critical triple that cannot be embedded into the enumerable Turing degrees. Our method promises to lead to a full characterization of the finite lattices embeddable into the enumerable Turing degrees.

We give a decision procedure for the ∀∃-theory of the weak truth-table (wtt) degrees of the recursively enumerable sets. The key to this decision procedure is a characterization of the finite lattices which can be embedded into the r.e. wtt-degrees by a map which preserves the least and greatest elements: a finite lattice has such an embedding if and only if it is distributive and the ideal generated by its cappable elements and the filter generated by its cuppable elements are (...) disjoint. We formulate general criteria that allow one to conclude that a distributive upper semi-lattice has a decidable two-quantifier theory. These criteria are applied not only to the weak truth-table degrees of the recursively enumerable sets but also to various substructures of the polynomial many-one (pm) degrees of the recursive sets. These applications to the pm degrees require no new complexity-theoretic results. The fact that the pm-degrees of the recursive sets have a decidable two-quantifier theory answers a question raised by Shore and Slaman in [21]. (shrink)

We provide three new results about interpolating 2-r.e. or 2-REA degrees between given r.e. degrees: Proposition 1.13. If c h are r.e. , c is low and h is high, then there is an a h which is REA in c but not r.e. Theorem 2.1. For all high r.e. degrees h g there is a properly d-r.e. degree a such that h a g and a is r.e. in h . Theorem 3.1. There is an incomplete nonrecursive r.e. A (...) such that every set REA in A and recursive in 0′ is of r. e. degree. The first proof is a variation on the construction of Soare and Stob . The second combines highness with a modified version of the proof strategy of Cooper et al. . The third theorem is a rather surprising result with a somewhat unusual proof strategy. Its proof is a 0‴ argument that at times moves left in the tree so that the accessible nodes are not linearly ordered at each stage. Thus the construction lacks a true path in the usual sense. Two substitute notions fill this role: The true nodes are the leftmost ones accessible infinitely often; the semitrue nodes are the leftmost ones such that there are infinitely many stages at which some extension is accessible. Another unusual feature of the construction is that it involves using distinct priority orderings to control the interactions of different parts of the construction. (shrink)

Recently, several authors have explored the connections between NP-complete problems for finite objects and the complexity of their analogs for infinite objects. In this paper, we will categorize infinite versions of several problems arising from finite complexity theory in terms of their recursion theoretic complexity and proof theoretic strength. These infinite analogs can behave in a variety of unexpected ways.

We show that the Π 4 -theory of the partial order of recursively enumerable weak truth-table degrees is undecidable, and give a new proof of the similar fact for r.e. T-degrees. This is accomplished by introducing a new coding scheme which consists in defining the class of finite bipartite graphs with parameters.

We show that the $\Pi_4$-theory of the partial order of recursively enumerable weak truth-table degrees is undecidable, and give a new proof of the similar fact for r.e. T-degrees. This is accomplished by introducing a new coding scheme which consists in defining the class of finite bipartite graphs with parameters.

Answering a question of Per Lindström, we show that there is no “plus-capping” degree, i.e. that for any incomplete r.e. degreew, there is an incomplete r.e. degreea>w such that there is no r.e. degreev>w witha∩v=w.

We show the decidability of the existential theory of the recursively enumerable degrees in the language of Turing reducibility, Turing reducibility of the Turing jumps, and least and greatest element.

By constructing a maximal incomplete d.r.e. degree, the nondensity of the partial order of the d.r.e. degrees is established. An easy modification yields the nondensity of the n-r.e. degrees and of the ω-r.e. degrees.

Work in the setting of the recursively enumerable sets and their Turing degrees. A set X is low if X', its Turning jump, is recursive in $\varnothing'$ and high if X' computes $\varnothing''$ . Attempting to find a property between being low and being recursive, Bickford and Mills produced the following definition. W is deep, if for each recursively enumerable set A, the jump of $A \bigoplus W$ is recursive in the jump of A. We prove that there are no (...) deep degrees other than the recursive one. Given a set W, we enumerate a set A and approximate its jump. The construction of A is governed by strategies, indexed by the Turning functionals Φ. Simplifying the situation, a typical strategy converts a failure to recursively compute W into a constraint on the enumeration of A, so that $(W \bigoplus A)'$ is forced to disagree with Φ(-; A'). The conversion has some ambiguity; in particular, A cannot be found uniformly from W. We also show that there is a "moderately" deep degree: There is a low nonzero degree whose join with any other low degree is not high. (shrink)